An Open Letter to President Obama Regarding Syria

I’ve tried very hard to support you all these years. I attended your first inauguration. (It was very cold.) I voted for you twice. I even paid a lot of money to have my picture taken with you. You were charming. Presidential. I told you I believed in you. All these years while you’ve been president and I’ve been CEO of my third-generation family-owned and independent business during the economic crisis, the wars, the ongoing environmental crisis, the political gridlock and insanity, my happy thought was that “at least I’m not the President!” We are the same age, you and I. And you’ve had a tough road of it.

But now you are, perhaps, at the biggest fork in the road you are likely to ever face. One fork bears a sign that says “Attack Syria.” That is a well-worn road, littered with the bodies of children and soldiers, civilians and suicides (both military and nonmilitary). It is a classic road, where ego and history seemingly say a president must travel as some sort of rite of honor. But it’s also a road that leads to more bitterness, more anger, and endless tragedy.

It’s a choice that validates an old, outdated paradigm that says any attack, any war is worth winning—even though there is no such thing as winning. Each war “win” plants the seeds of future wars. Each attack leads to a counterattack. Each “win” creates new fertile ground in which future generations of terrorists can grow: in the hearts of children who have lost parents and homes, in the souls of people who have felt betrayed by their leaders and their neighbors, and in the wounded bodies and hearts that can never heal.

But there is another road. The road less traveled. There’s no clear map, but the rewards of the journey are much greater. It’s the road of heroes like Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. Ghandi. And many others whose names have been lost to history. These are people who were able to make change by speaking the truth from the heart and refusing to engage in more violence. And through them, not only has true change happened, but the spirits of the whole world have been lifted, too, in the process. They provide beacons of hope and inspiration for humanity.

I do not consider myself a Christian, but I would like to quote Jesus and ask, “Who among you has not sinned?” Yes, Syria has undoubtedly used chemical weapons on its own people. Maybe it was the government; maybe it was the opposition; maybe you know for sure. But here’s what I know for sure: We are no better. We have been using chemical weapons on our own children—and ourselves—for decades, the chemical weapons we use in agriculture to win the war on pests, weeds, and the false need for ever greater yields. While the effects of these “legal” chemical weapons might not be immediate and direct, they are no less deadly. And you, Mr. President, have had an unprecedented opportunity to stop it, but you haven’t. You haven’t. In fact, you have encouraged it. And I am supremely disappointed in that.

What got me thinking about this was one of those Facebook posts where there is a picture of you, Mr. President, talking to a child in a classroom. It’s an adorable picture because I know you genuinely care for children, and it shows. But the bubble coming out of your mouth says, “We are going to war with Syria because they poison their children” which is met with a little girl’s words, “So why don’t you bomb Monsanto, you prick.” Harsh, I know. Perhaps unfair. I know you probably don’t hang out on Facebook much, but it’s getting a lot of “shares” among my friends. Yes, even my liberal friends. I laughed when I first saw it. But the more I think about it, the angrier I get.

We’ve been trying to tell you for years that chemical companies like Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow, DuPont, Bayer Crops Sciences, and others are poisoning our children and our environment with your support and even, it seems, your encouragement. Just because their bodies aren’t lined up wrapped in sheets on the front pages of the newspapers around the world doesn’t mean it’s not true. Perhaps you’re surrounded by advisors who are keeping the truth from you. But I know many people who have spoken to you about this directly, and you seem not to understand or listen.

Is it about the money? Because if so, war will cost you more. Is it about food security? Because if so, you are destroying it. Is it about needing enough corn to make gasoline to reduce our dependence on foreign oil? Because if so, you are destroying our water, our soil, and our children’s future in the process. Is it about your lack of knowledge? Because if so, I’d be happy to come and explain it to you in a way that you can understand. As the CEO of the world’s leading health-and-wellness publisher and the granddaughter of the founder of the organic movement in America, I am uniquely qualified to explain it to you. And if I haven’t understood your reluctance to protect our children, then I truly do want to hear from you and listen to your perspective.

You are a smart man. You are not up for reelection. This is your big chance to make the right choice and take the right road, the road less traveled. This is your once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to leave a lasting legacy of peace and healing rather than more destruction. Syria and its refugees definitely need our help, though I am certain that a violent military strike will not provide the results you are looking for. Both our children and Syria’s deserve the chance to grow up free from chemical contamination and warfare. But that hope takes a different sort of action and courage, one that does not come with missiles and guns, drones, and destruction.

Our mutual hero Bruce Springsteen sings, “We Take Care of Our Own.” I believe we can take care of our own, as well as restore the world’s faith in American democracy, by acting with peace, compassion, and nonviolence—both at home and around the world.

I so want to continue to believe in you. I do. But I need you to do the hardest thing a man in your position can do: turn away from aggression and war and toward love and healing, turn away from foreign complicated and false “heroics” and take care of your own children at home. Then, you can also redefine what it means to be a real hero and a truly great president.

56 Responses to An Open Letter to President Obama Regarding Syria

“We have been using chemical weapons on our own children—and ourselves—for decades.” Americans have always been good at self-criticism. Maybe because it’s allowed here. But because of the rather slow moving nature of democracy (especially in the two party system, which encourages black/white, us/them, zero sum thinking?), we’re not good on acting on that criticism. We need more leaders, not just in administration, but in business, education, and other areas of society, who not only speak up, but also “act up” – let’s boycott, let’s grow our own food, let’s make more effort to find local, reliable food suppliers, let’s find out about laws we can make at a local level to challenge federal laws, let’s teach our children how to live without being subservient to corporations who don’t give a damn about the people that support their very enterprise. It’s important for our President to take the “right” actions, but it’s maybe just as important for us to act on our own behalf as well.

Thank you for expressing my thoughts within on a very important subject!!! My community was poisoned by a WWII chemical warfare agent in 2006 known as Ethoprop. It was so horrendous that our community popped up on the radar screen for bio terrorism because so many dogs and cats were ill which was documented by Banfield!!

This is an important discussion for our country. Thanks for using your unique position to make the case. The potential impact of the local/organic movement is staggering: healthcare, employment, environment – budget crisis. Everyone has a chance to vote with their daily meal.

I only hope that Pres. Obama sees your words and hears them with his heart!! We all need to hear and follow the truth. What difference is there if innocent people are killed with gas or with drone strikes? They are still innocent and still dead? When men like McCain and the Speaker of the House both support your actions, that should tell you, Mr. Obama, that you are on the wrong side of the issue. When 90% of our people want GMO’s labeled and Congress opposes it, something is wrong. Most of Europe won’t allow GMO’s in their food, and most are opposed to attacking Syria. The majority of Americans are sick to death of war and want it to end, and Congress will probably approve of a strike that will help NO ONE. When will this end? It should end now. I hope someone gives your letter directly to the President, Maria, and that he finally opens his heart and mind and says, no more killing of Syria’s children and of our own children!! Thank you so much, Maria.

this is fabulous – – thank you for sharing this. My sentiments exactly. My husband and I both worked to see him elected, and we are overwhelmingly disappointed. he has proven to us that the office of the president is just a puppet post for corporate America. How very discouraging.

If anyone could write what I was thinking and feeling on this issue, it would be you. And you did. I sure hope he reads and truly considers your words and understands your meaning. I hope he takes you up on your offer for consultation on the poisoning issue too. For all our sakes. Thank you Maria.

Spot on Maria! Couldn’t have said it better! The Syria issue, that’s a whole ‘nother kettle of fish! I wouldn’t want to be in Obama’s shoes. Don’t envy him at all! It is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation. A very tough call. Nothing ever is as simple as it looks when it comes to the Middle East and war. It’s simple to us, but there are many issues bubbling underneath it all. It will be tragic, no matter what the outcome.

As Paula says, we have to act on our own behalf also. There are many of us doing our bit, but it takes more than a village, many more of us have to find within ourselves the strength to get moving on this. The government will NEVER do what is in the best interest of the people, where environmental and farming issues are concerned. In the pockets of too many big companies. Let’s get it right this time around.

Thank you forever for your voice. I have also become very disappointed in the President. I truly believe that he will understand fully what you are expressing…I wonder…is he being bullied by the Pentagon or something??? What’s up?

I don’t know the right answer to this question. The civil war happening in Syria seems more complicated than good side vs. bad side, namely because we don’t know how the “rebels” will see America if they defeat Assad; but doesn’t it seem like a dictator is massacre-ing its citizens who protested?

Isn’t it right to intervene when people are being killed unnecessarily and unjustly, if we can help?

For example we probably could’ve saved lives in Rwanda.
Didn’t we help in Serbia and save lives?

I have no agenda and I don’t know the right answer.
I feel, though, that maybe it could be morally just for ALL countries that can help the “rebels” should.

I think this is why it’s such a difficult question, politics aside.

I just wish the “rebels” could go ahead and achieve victory.

It’s not OUR responsibility. We can’t fix everything; but I feel bad for the “freedom fighters” who are fighting a GOVERNMENT MILITARY, even if terrorist-types might seek to co-opt their fight.

Just wanted to “say” that as its been weighing on me since this started.

It’s interesting that the Obamas have an organic garden and Michelle has been leading the charge for healthy eating. This would just take it to the next level, but it isn’t getting mainstream play…precisely because the negative results are slow-moving….as Maria says here -just because the bodies aren’t wrapped up in sheets in the newspaper doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.

Thank you for this. It brought tears to my eyes because you so eloquently spoke the absolute truth. I can only hope that somehow, this actually passes by Pres. Obama and others in the position of power take the time to read and ponder it with an open heart and mind.

A deeply moving statement, straight from the heart. I hope the president listens and acts accordingly. Thank you Maria.
A comment about Paula’s response: it’s easy to criticize the “2-party” system but if you think about it a bit, it’s (unfortunately) not that simple. Think about this: what would happen if we had more than 2 parties, let’s say 3. Elections would suddenly be trickier because the total votes would be divided by 3 now, instead of 2. It’s conceivable that no single party would earn a majority (by definition, more than 50%). Then 2 of the 3 would have to form a coalition and run on a common platform. If they win, they would fight even more than they fight now once in power. What a mess!
If we had 4, 5 or more (as is the case in Italy, Greece and other countries), it will get even more complicated. Elections would have to be repeated, and repeated again. That’s what happened in Greece last year in the middle of their great depression and Italy seems to have elections every year or so, only to see the coalitions break up and repeat the elections all over again.
This may be beside the point, even. What makes us think that the leaders of the other parties are in some way better than the ones available today? In practice, new parties and their leaders would spring up from splinter groups within the existing parties (see Tea Party from Republican). Then we would have to chose between 3, 4, 5 or more inadequate leaders instead of 2.
I don’t know what the answer is, I only know that it’s easy to criticize the 2-party system and a more-than-2-party system would be worse, not better.

Ms. Rodale,
WOW, you started great, then you got hung up on your title (CEO), not that it makes you any smarter than the President of this United States by being a CEO, then you went on to talk about the children, and not the citizens of the United States. Is it not correct, that the PARENTS are the ones that make the decisions (just like the First Lady) to feed them or not chemically treated food? I understand that this is a democracy, but you went too far in belittling the President, I find that, for a person in your position, not correct, and very unprofessional, now you’re a hero amongst your followers, yeah, I guess she told the President, wow! It’s very easy to judge when it’s not your decision to make? You made your point and you should have left it there. As a passed leader in one of the largest Banks in the United States, I am very disappointed in you to have used this public means to vent. A private letter would have been sufficient?

My own personal response to Enrique is that Maria’s response is correct to be public. Pres. Obama’s decision to bomb Syria is a very public (not Private) response and it requires all of us to let the world know how we feel about this decision. And what difference does it make if you are a passed leader of a large bank, that doesn’t make you the ethical leader of the rest of us. Bankers don’t have a very good record in this country for being upfront and honest. Maria has every right to tell the truth in whatever public forum she chooses. This is still a free country with our right to freedom of speech. That’s why you are free to give your opinion, but it doesn’t mean Maria doesn’t have the same right. I am grate for truthful people, and Maria is one of the best.

You make serious accusations, but cite no scientific evidence for your extreme views. Do you really think hundreds of thousands of scientists and every major scientific organization world wide are all lying? It seems pretty improbable and a serious challenge to all of their characters. This list shows over 600 papers demonstrating the safety of GMO crops. http://www.biofortified.org/genera/studies-for-genera/

Forgot to say that I think it’s brilliant that links between issues such as aggression towards Syria and food system problems are made clear here. In the end, leadership is really about “taking care” or “caring”.

@Jane: Glad you mentioned the gardens at the White House. Haven’t seen much publicity in that vein recently either, though I’m now living abroad. What needs to be said is that everyone (really, everyone, not just those with means to hire gardeners, like the President) can grow something edible. Why not hand out free seeds at schools, for example?

@George: I know about the foibles of multiple party systems. Germany, where I’m currently living, is in the midst of an election cycle and it’s true that having 3, 4 or 5 inadequate candidates/parties (in this case) instead of only 2 is discouraging. However, hearing more than 2 points of view is worth the discouragement. There are indeed more than 2 parties in the U.S., but only 2 get any real publicity because in almost every case (except at local levels), only they have any real chance of governing. Here in the multi-party system, all 5 of the parties who have gained more than 5% in the past election are covered in the media. That means that Germans have at least 5 different platforms to hear and consider instead of just 2. And that means that “fringier” ideas, like banning GMOs (though the EU might be opening a back door there) and changing over to 100% renewable energy are heard on a national level and become more believable and more doable than when those ideas come from outside groups, as they must in the U.S. In the end I have to agree with Churchill that “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

I don’t need to agree with you to appreciate and respect your conviction, intelligence and exposition on these topics: the killings in Syria, food sourcing, genetics and chemical exposure. I really love being able to read and reflect on thoughtful opinions on all sides. Hopefully, they’ll make my own decisions more thoughtful and careful ones.

Thank you, Maria. I hope your words are heard. It amazes me how money speaks so much louder than truth. We are living in a country filled with cognitive dissonance (though many are beginning to awaken) about what is really going on with our food supply. It is so easy to think it can’t possibly be true, but if we all don’t soon face the reality, and those with the power to do something about it do not take action, it will continue to get worse.

@Enrique – I understand that yes, it is a parent’s duty to see that their children are fed wholesome food. However I can tell you that in my work with GMO-Free PA I speak to people every day who are not familiar with GMOs. And I understand why. As a mother of 4 who was raised on natural living, I was unaware of how far-reaching genetically modified ingredients were until a few years ago, and it sickens me to know that I have raised my children on some of this garbage. (it is still difficult to completely avoid, especially with schools serving it up for lunch)

What scares me the most is that between poison food and fracking, at what point will we no longer be able to truly farm organically because there is no unadulterated land left?

@James: The aim of this column was not to prove that GMOs could be dangerous, but instead to point out interesting connections between what’s happening in Syria (civil war, attacks on civilians) and what’s happening in the USA (sale of non-labeled genetically modified foods, which can be seen as an attack on civilians). For this reason, I think, scientific information and analysis was not included.

Possible solutions in both situations include honesty and transparency, both of which are much more difficult than violence and rhetoric. I’m pretty sure it could be shown that civilians were actually poisoned in Syria, but because the persons responsible have not/will not honestly own up to their actions, the situation cannot really be evaluated and will remain intractable and intransparent. In the case of GMOs in the USA, honesty is lost to making profit on one hand and on genuine lack of knowledge on the other. Science provides applications far faster than we can test their safety or wisdom, so we will likely never again have time for “honest” evaluations of new technology. Transparency, however, provides a real solution here: labeling GM foods would allow individuals to inform themselves and make their own evaluations. (By the way, the “biofortified” site you mention seems to offer a refreshing lack of polemicized rhetoric.) Providing this small bit of information would, in effect, stop the “attacks” made on civilians in the form of unlabeled food.

Perhaps labeling GMOs is not at the same level as naming those responsible for poisoning hundreds of people, and labeling GMOs does not indicate that they are poisonous. However, we have a right to know, just like the folks in Syria.

Well said, Paula, thank you!! If there is “nothing” wrong with GMO’s then Why are the corporations so against stating the fact that their product contains GMO’s? If they are so harmless, then they should be proud to label them on everything. Spending millions of dollars to try to keep the public from knowing if they are in the food or not, speaks more to hiding the truth than to being proud of their product.

The point of contention we have, I think, is that foods using the GMO *process* are equally (ore more) nutritious and do not contain anything dangerous that needs to be labeled. The idea of labeling a process seems odd when you recognize that the resulting food is the same. This is reminiscent of the move to label beef from artificially fertilized cattle. Labeling these identical foods only serves to stigmatize them to the uninformed consumer, and in some countries has resulted in their being carried at all. This only raises prices for everyone since lower cost weed and pest control reduces farming expenses.

Indeed, GMOs are not “contained” in foods in the way that preservatives or synthetic materials are added to foods. However, GM foods are modified, i.e. a GM apple is not just an apple, and consumers have a right to know about this modification, regardless of whether it is beneficial or harmful or profitable or created purely in the service of feeding humanity.

I’m not sure that I agree that GM foods undergo a GM “process”, but if so, labeling is already in use for processes used in growing, harvesting and preserving food, e.g. pasteurized, homogenized milk and pasteurized eggs. These process labels have not stopped people from buying these products.

And the food that results from the process is not the same afterwards; otherwise, why would it be processed?

Consumers have a right to know about anything that might be dangerous or allergenic added to a food, but when NOTHING is added that meets those criteria, labeling has no meaning except to stigmatize perfectly safe crops. The foods are nutritionally the same as every major scientific organization has agreed.

My allergies were cut in half when I went to organic food. The major scientific organizations who agree that GMO’s are nutritionally the same are on someone’s payroll. There is plenty of proof that GMO’s are harmful, it’s just that those who are making millions on GMO’s don’t want anyone else to believe the truth. We will work hard for the health of our children. Count on it.

If you can find some peer-reviewed papers to support you hypothesis that GMOs are harmful, post the links so we can read them. Natural News doesn’t count. Otherwise you are accusing a huge number of honest scientists in many universities of a huge fraud, which seems even less likely.

As I said earlier, “Science provides applications far faster than we can test their safety or wisdom, so we will likely never again have time for “honest” evaluations of new technology.” Peer reviewed studies take time and this technology is quite new. Here (http://www.enveurope.com/content/23/1/10) is a paper with some initial findings, but which “suggest[s] that the studies should be improved and prolonged, as well as being made compulsory”. In terms of food that is “designed” to feed billions (even without their knowledge), I agree that long-term testing is not only reasonable, but mandatory.

Finally, here (http://www.globalresearch.ca/gmo-scandal-the-long-term-effects-of-genetically-modified-food-on-humans/14570) is one possible reason that there aren’t more peer reviewed papers in this area – not because GMOs aren’t harmful, but because the respective companies won’t even let scientists do their work. I think I’ve heard this before about companies associated with these industries and products: tobacco, silicon breast implants, pharmaceuticals such as Thalidomide, chemicals such as DDT, “clean” nuclear energy and on and on. What’s wrong with a little prudency and honest scientific inquiry here?

Someone has put my thoughts into words! Well thought out and eloquently put. We need you in Washington to teach the spin doctors how to make each sentence come from both the brain and the heart. This adds up to honesty.

Maria, Wow…thanks for being so brave to speak to the President in the manner that you did, it was very well written. I have always believed in taking care of our own children, people and country before taking care of the world. Europe and some Asia countries will not accept imports of our food supplies because of the chemicals we use. Chemicals in our food supplies and even drugs that they have banned in their counties but USA continues to use. Shame on us for allowing the government to decided what is good for us. We the people should decide what is good for us and our children. Information is knowledge and strength. Maria, keep informing us so that we can have the strength to make the right decisions.

Most Popular

Drawing on findings from leading health researchers as well as conversations with both chemical and organic farmers from coast to coast, Maria Rodale irrefutably outlines the unacceptably high cost of chemical farming on our health and our environment.

About Maria

By day I’m chairman and CEO of one of the largest independent publishers left in America. By night I’m simply M.O.M. (which stands for Mean Old Mom). I’m a writer, cook, organic enthusiast, romance novel lover, and major music fan who does yoga.Read more